No chancellor has had to make such far-reaching decisions, and no European head of government supports Ukraine to this extent. Olaf Scholz is already a historic chancellor, but also a much criticized one. Book author Daniel Brössler helps to better understand this very unique character.
He has been Chancellor of this country for almost two and a half years now and Olaf Scholz is still a mystery to Germans – but very few people imagine the solution to be particularly exciting. The Social Democrat is already a historic head of government: He has to navigate the country through the greatest threat of war that has afflicted the Federal Republic in the past 75 years. This raises questions such as: What motivates the 65-year-old from Hamburg when he wrestles with Putin? What experiences have shaped him when he has to decide on German arms deliveries to Ukraine? Why does this undoubtedly highly intelligent man not understand how to communicate his politics better?
The journalist Daniel Brössler provides answers and attempts at explanations in his book “A German Chancellor – Olaf Scholz, the War and Fear”. He traces how Scholz became, who he is, how he experienced the weeks before the Russian attack on February 24, 2022 – and how the Chancellor reacted and governed in the following two years. The approximately 300 pages are insightful even for people who have closely followed this period professionally or out of personal interest, and are written in a gripping way. At the same time, readers actually get closer to this “politician with peculiarities,” as Brössler writes: his weaknesses, strengths, his motives and his inherent contradictions.
This applies in particular to the 40 pages about Scholz’s growing up and his time as a young man as well as to the chapter “Turning of the Times”, when Scholz had to decide very alone whether he would involve Germany indirectly in this war. “No other chancellor in the post-war period had to decide on such fundamental things in such a short time,” writes Brössler, if one ignores Helmut Kohl’s reunification policy, which meant seizing the chance for great happiness. Scholz, on the other hand, has had a shared responsibility almost since day one of his chancellorship to ensure that there are no atomic bombs falling in Europe. One of the strengths of this book is that it considers the seriousness of the situation without being alarmist and acknowledges that Scholz is under the immense pressure of his office.
From Marxist to NATO advocate
Brössler, senior editor of the parliamentary office of the “Süddeutsche Zeitung”, has been accompanying Scholz for years, but did not approach the Chancellor without his own input. Brössler himself was a Moscow correspondent for several years. “This social democratic Russia policy is something that every German Russia correspondent has suffered from,” says Brössler at the presentation of his book alongside “Stern” policy chief Nico Fried and Green Party European politician Anton Hofreiter. Former Moscow colleagues from other media outlets nod knowingly. Not only because of Vladimir Putin’s loyal friend Gerhard Schröder, the major Russian invasion has thrown a spotlight on the SPD’s notorious Russia connection and its consequences.
Scholz “actually did much more for Ukraine than I would have expected from a Social Democratic chancellor before the attack,” said Brössler. The ambivalent praise is based on Brössler’s now profound knowledge of Scholz’s political career. After all, as a young socialist in the 1980s, he was not only a peace activist who agitated against the stationing of nuclear-equipped US medium-range missiles in Germany and Europe and believed the real aggressor was in Washington instead of Moscow, but also a convinced Marxist and as such repeatedly in the GDR and visiting the Soviet Union. In terms of worldview, the lawyer Scholz, who grew up in humble circumstances, has come a long way since then and is a staunch supporter of the transatlantic defense alliance NATO.
But what remains from the early days? “Scholz has no romantic feelings for Russia,” writes Brössler. That’s what sets him apart from so many in his party. Even before he took office, he had no illusions about Putin, whose brutality, ruthlessness and imperialistic madness honestly outraged Olaf Scholz, is Brössler’s observation. From Scholz’s point of view, a defeat for Ukraine would be a catastrophe. But the author also says during the book launch: “We would let Ukraine fall before we go in with our own troops.” Germany’s solidarity and willingness to take risks have limits and Scholz acts with this awareness.
The power of nuclear fear
“The fear of nuclear power develops an enormous political power. It shapes a generation, it also shapes Scholz,” writes Brössler about Scholz’s experiences from the 80s. The Chancellor takes seriously the fact that Putin repeatedly threatens Ukraine’s Western supporters with the use of nuclear weapons. He considers it his personal success to have persuaded Chinese head of state Xi Jinping to publicly condemn these threats in November 2022. “Armageddon is cancelled,” says Brössler, describing the mood on board during the flight home from China. However, Putin’s verbal restraint proved to be of limited duration.
Because Putin continues to threaten nuclear escalation. When dealing with this, the Chancellery is also counting on the fact that the Germans will honor the fact that this actually very unpopular Chancellor has kept them out of a war in the 2025 federal election. “It would be naive to believe that the question ‘How does this affect the election campaign?’ doesn’t play a role,” says Brössler at the book launch about Scholz’s Ukraine policy. There is a fine line between confronting legitimate fears and stoking them yourself. It remains to be seen how the SPD manages this balancing act, the more it and its top candidate, who advertises itself as “Peace Chancellor”, move towards the election campaign.
Scholz remains Scholz
Defiance and insult are not an insignificant motive, just like Scholz’s fundamental refusal to allow himself to be put under public pressure by anyone. “The resentment that Scholz developed against his critics over the course of the war stems from his conviction that they underestimate the significance of his decisions but overestimate Germany’s possibilities,” writes Brössler. Scholz’s anger may be justified, but one looks in vain for any traces of self-doubt on the part of the Chancellor in Brössler’s book.
Scholz’s communicative weaknesses and his refusal to include the Germans in his deliberations are part of the reason for the lack of recognition. “Scholz would only like to speak when he has something to announce,” writes Brössler. The author cannot or does not want to explain what possible scenarios the Chancellor has in mind for a favorable end to the war. What Scholz hoped to achieve for Ukraine at what point in time, what he expected from it and what kind of aid he gave it, cannot be found out from Brössler either. No German participation in the war and Russia should not win: Maybe the Chancellor really has nothing more than that to guide his big and many small decisions.
The fact that he so often remains vague, that he repeatedly clings to empty phrases and slogans and loses himself in convoluted sentences under pressure, reinforces the impression that the Chancellor is aloof and aloof. Brössler leaves it open whether Scholz’s supposed arrogance is also the protective armor of a man who was never the type of buddy who lacks warmth and hugs. Scholz, who his classmates have not understood, will no longer change. “The fact that he was able to become chancellor as he was encouraged him to remain as chancellor as he is,” writes Brössler.
“Scholz doesn’t want to disclose anything”
In the midst of its most existential crisis, the Federal Republic has a chancellor who is completely at peace with himself. So much stubbornness can irritate, especially allies. Brössler also traces how Scholz so aggressively linked the provision of the Leopard 2 main battle tank to the delivery of the American M1 Abrams that the US government around Joe Biden got the impression that the tail was trying to wag the dog here. The fact that Scholz has no friends when it comes to his convictions is, from one perspective, loyalty to principles and reliability, from another perspective, stubbornness and unteachability.
History will have to show whether Scholz did enough to avert damage to the German people on the one hand and to prevent a defeat for Ukraine on the other. It is far too early to make a final judgment about this Chancellor. If you would like to form an opinion until then about how Olaf Scholz governs and what guides him, “A German Chancellor” is an excellent choice – while being entertained. Also because the author sheds light on the Chancellor’s character without illuminating him. “Scholz doesn’t want to reveal anything, especially not his innermost being,” writes Brössler. It is to the author’s credit that he respects this limit and still paints a coherent picture of what makes the man tick, who, through no fault of his own, is now turning the big wheel of history.